Make and explore Freedom of Information requestsFollow this request
There is 1 person following this request
Act on what you've learnt
Similar requests
Email addresses for academies
To Department for Children, Schools and Families by John Cross 6 January 2010
Analysis of cost savings to government of Academy Schools
To Department for Education by Joe Turner 25 June 2010
CfBT and Academies in Lincolnshire
To Department for Education by Zoe Bunting 16 September 2011
Meetings with the United Learning Trust
To Department for Children, Schools and Families by Scott D 26 June 2008
Governor, salary and other information request
To Excelsior Academy by G. Burton 12 April 2011
Correspondence with Wirral headteachers relating to academy programme
To Department for Children, Schools and Families by Doris Tuttle 16 March 2010
Suitability of the site of Park High School, Wirral, for an academy
To Department for Children, Schools and Families by Doris Tuttle 3 February 2010
List of organisations and individuals approved to sponsor academies and/or 'free schools'
To Department for Education by Rachel Jones 11 October 2010
Misuse of prescribed drugs for ADHD in teenagers
To Department of Health by Jan Cosgrove 8 September 2009
Annual Accounts and Company Directors Report
To Partnerships for Schools Limited by Simon Jones 6 January 2011
Decision to expand the target for 200 academy schools to 400 academy schools made In November/ December 2006.
Roz Stevens made this Freedom of Information request to Department for Children, Schools and Families
The request was partially successful.
From: Roz Stevens
21 May 2009
Dear Sir or Madam,
Please could you send me all written and electronic records of
letters, minutes, other meeting summaries and reports leading up to
the decision to expand the target of 200 academy schools to 400
academy schools announced in November - December 2006
Thank you.
Yours faithfully,
Roz Stevens
Department for Children, Schools and Families
21 May 2009
Dear Ms Stevens,
Thank you for your recent email. A reply will be sent to you as soon as
possible (where a response is required). For information, the
departmental standard for correspondence received is that responses
should be sent within 15 working days or 20 working days if you are
requesting information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.
Your correspondence has been allocated the reference number 2009/0045773
Thank you.
Central Allocation Team
Public Communications Team
Tel: 0870 0002288
www.dcsf.gov.uk
show quoted sections
Department for Children, Schools and Families
12 June 2009
Dear Roz Stevens
I am writing to keep you informed about your FOI request relating to the
decision to increase the number of academies from 200 to 400 that was
announced in November 2006. I am currently requesting the necessary
information and will respond to your request as soon as possible.
Your sincerely
Prabjeet Pardesi
............................................................................................................................
Prabjeet Pardesi (Miss)
Academies Policy Unit
show quoted sections
Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.
From: Roz Stevens
29 June 2009
Dear Prabjeet Pardesi,
You wrote to me on the 12 June indicating that you were requesting
the information concerning the decision to double the target of
planned academy schools and that you would respond 'as soon as
possible'. The normal response deadline under Freedom of
Information legislation was set for the 19 June. Could you give me
a progress update?
With thanks and yours sincerely,
Roz Stevens
Department for Children, Schools and Families
30 June 2009
Dear Roz
Please accept my apologies for the delay, the request is currently with
the Minister for consideration. I will provide a full response as soon
as possible.
Yours sincerely
Prabjeet Pardesi
show quoted sections
Department for Children, Schools and Families
1 July 2009
Dear Mrs Stevens,
Response to Your Freedom of Information Request
I am writing in response to your request for information dated 21 May 2009
to advise you that the information you requested is being withheld under
the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act). The exemptions that apply
to this information are sections 21, section 36(2)(b) and (2)(c) of the
Act.
You requested "all written and electronic records of letters, minutes,
other meeting summaries and reports leading up to the decision to expand
the target of 200 academy schools to 400 academy schools announced in
November - December 2006."
Section 36(2)(b) of the Act exempts from disclosure information which, in
the reasonable opinion of a qualified person would, or would be likely to,
inhibit the free and frank provision of advice, or the free and frank
exchange of views for the purposes of deliberation.
Exemption under Section 36 can only be used if, in the reasonable view of
a "qualified person", disclosure of the requested information would have a
prejudicial effect. In this case, Diana Johnson, Parliamentary Under
Secretary of State for Schools and Minister responsible for FOI, has
considered the matter and decided that, in her reasonable opinion,
disclosure of the information would have, or would be likely to have, the
above-mentioned effect.
Exemption under Section 36 is a qualified exemption, subject to a public
interest test. This requires officials to identify if the public interest
in applying the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the
information. This test has been carried out and it is our considered
opinion in this case that the balance of public interest is against
disclosure for the following reasons.
Officials at the Department for Children, Schools and Families engaged in
free and frank discussions in the course of the decision to increase the
number of academies from 200 to 400, and the disclosure of these
discussions would be likely to prejudice open discussions for the purpose
of policy making leading to less informed decision making.
It's important for the process of effective government and therefore in
the public interest that officials be allowed space to develop their
thinking concerning the development and expansion of the academies
programme. Good government depends on good decision making and this,
needs to be based on the best advice available including a full
consideration of options. Disclosure of information on such deliberations
would encroach upon that space and inhibit discussion in the future
leading to poorer decision making that is recorded inadequately. This is
not in the public interest. The Department has concluded that, on
balance, it is in the public interest to exempt the information requested
from release.
If you have any queries about this letter, please contact me at the email
below. Please remember to quote the reference number above in any future
communications.
If you are unhappy with the service you have received in relation to your
request and wish to make a complaint or request a review of our decision,
you should write to me.
If you are not content with the outcome your complaint, you may apply
directly to the Information Commissioner for a decision. Generally, the
ICO cannot make a decision unless you have exhausted our complaints
procedure.
Yours sincerely,
Prabjeet Pardesi
ACADEMIES DIVISION
[email address]
[1]www.dcsf.gov.uk
Your correspondence has been allocated the reference number 2009/0045773.
show quoted sections
Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.
References
Visible links
1. http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/
From: Roz Stevens
1 July 2009
Dear Prabjeet Pardesi,
Many thanks for facilitating this response to my Freedom of
Information request.
It is likely that I will be writing back to you by the start of
next week requesting an internal review of this DCSF decision. I
just need a few days to consider and then compose my response.
With thanks
Yours faithfully,
Roz Stevens
From: Roz Stevens
3 July 2009
Dear Prabjeet Pardesi,
Please could you forward this request for an internal review to the
Minister responsible for FOI at DCSF. Thanks.
Thank you for your letter of 1 July, 2009 informing me that you
have decided not to release papers relating to the expansion of the
Academy Schools programme, citing section 36 of the Freedom of
Information Act.
As I understand it, section 36 is a 'qualified exemption' requiring
DCSF's judgement whether the public interest is upheld best by
publication or non-publication of requested material. I would like
to request an internal review on the basis that the public interest
is best served by release of the material.
In February 2007 the National Audit Office, in their report on
Academies,indicated that the cost of 200 academies was estimated to
be £5 million. I therefore assume that £10 million will be required
to cover the cost of the doubling of the target to 400 schools.
This is a significant amount of money and I think it is in the
public interest to be reassured that a decision costing £5 million
was supported by a considerable level of analysis and supporting
paperwork. The DCSF decision not to release the paperwork - or even
some of the paperwork - leaves a question in the air that cannot be
answered.
Not only is it in public interest to understand the reasoning
behind such costly decisions, it is also a concern that the money
spent is then apportioned in a way that is congruent with the
strategic goals of the academies programme. I understand that a key
intention was to 'break the cycle of underachievement and low
aspirations in areas of deprivation with historically low
performance' (Ref: Armstrong, Bunting and Larsen (July 2009),
'Academies: a model for school improvement? Key findings from a
five-year longitudinal evaluation', Management in Education 23(30
pp 118). Given that five public schools have recently become
academies, I question the suitability of allocating public money
for purposes outside the remit of the programme.
I would ask that you reconsider your decision and release all or
part of the paperwork in the public interest.
Thank you for your attention in this matter.
Yours faithfully,
Roz Stevens
From: Roz Stevens
21 July 2009
Dear Prabjeet Pardesi
I sent a letter to you on 3 July requesting an internal review but
have not received any confirmation. Could you let me know whether
you have received this letter and, if yes, when I should expect a
reply? If no, I will re-send the original.
With thanks,
Yours faithfully,
Roz Stevens
Department for Children, Schools and Families
23 July 2009
Jenny
Can you please send out the attached update to the correspondent from
the PEU, Information mailbox.
Dear Mrs Stevens
To confirm that I have received your email and a review meeting has been
scheduled to take place. I will contact you again with the outcome of
the review in 7 working days.
Yours sincerely
Prabjeet Pardesi
show quoted sections
From: Roz Stevens
23 July 2009
23 July 2009
Dear Prabjeet Pardesi,
Many thanks for your response.
Yours faithfully,
Roz Stevens
From: Roz Stevens
15 August 2009
Dear Prabjeet Pardesi,
On 23 July you indicated that a meeting had been scheduled to
discuss my internal review appeal and that you would be able to let
me know the outcome of that meeting within seven days.
I would be most grateful if you could supply me with a progress
report.
With thanks and yours sincerely,
Roz Stevens
Department for Children, Schools and Families
18 August 2009
Dear Mrs Stevens,
Thank you for your email dated 15 August 2009 requesting a progress update
on your request for an FOI internal review. In carrying out the review we
conducted another thorough search and found additional material that was
in scope of your request. The additional material is currently being
considered by Ministers. I will inform you of the outcome of the internal
review along with the decision on whether any of the additional material
can be released by the end of the week. Please accept my apologies for
the delay.
Yours sincerely,
Prabjeet Pardesi
ACADEMIES DIVISION
[1]www.dcsf.gov.uk
Your correspondence has been allocated the reference number 2009/0072305.
show quoted sections
Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.
References
Visible links
1. http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/
Department for Children, Schools and Families
19 August 2009
Dear Roz
Apologies for the delay, I'm writing to update you on your request for an
internal review. In carrying out the review we conducted another thorough
search and found additional material that was in scope of your request.
The additional material is currently being considered by Ministers. I will
inform you of the outcome of the internal review along with the decision
on whether any of the additional material by the end of the week.
Yours sincerely
Prabjeet Pardesi
show quoted sections
Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.
Department for Children, Schools and Families
21 August 2009
Dear Mrs Stevens,
I am writing to inform you that the Department has now completed its
internal review following your request of 1 July 2009.
The Department has made an independent re-assessment of the case. I
chaired the panel as a senior official not involved in this case and have
decided that while some of the information cannot be disclosed for the
same reasons set out in the letter of 3 July, some information can be
released. A copy of the information which can be disclosed is attached.
Some names have been withheld under Section 40 of the FOI Act as indicated
in the attachment.
In carrying out the review we conducted another thorough search and found
additional information to be considered in scope of your
original request. The material was reviewed and, for the same reasons set
out in the letter of 3 July, it will be withheld under the Freedom of
Information Act 2000 (the Act). The exemptions that apply to this
information are sections 21, section 36(2)(b) and (2)(c) of the Act.
Exemption under Section 36 can only be used if, in the reasonable view of
a "qualified person", disclosure of the requested information would have a
prejudicial effect. In this case, a Minister, has considered the matter
and decided that, in their reasonable opinion, disclosure of the
information would have, or would be likely to have, the above-mentioned
effect. Exemption under Section 36 is a qualified exemption, subject to a
public interest test. This requires officials to identify if the public
interest in applying the exemption outweighs the public interest in
disclosing the information. This test has been carried out and it is our
considered opinion in this case that the balance of public interest is
against disclosure for the reasons set out in the letter of 3 July.
Officials at the Department for Children, Schools and Families engaged in
free and frank discussions in the course of the decision to increase the
number of academies from 200 to 400, and the disclosure of these
discussions would be likely to prejudice open discussions for the purpose
of policy making leading to less informed decision making.
It's important for the process of effective government and therefore in
the public interest that officials be allowed space to develop their
thinking concerning the development and expansion of the academies
programme. Good government depends on good decision making and this,
needs to be based on the best advice available including a full
consideration of options. Disclosure of information on such deliberations
would encroach upon that space and inhibit discussion in the future
leading to poorer decision making that is recorded inadequately. This is
not in the public interest. The Department has concluded that, on
balance, it is in the public interest to exempt the information requested
from release.
If you wish to request a review of the additional information and our
decision to withhold it, you should write to Prabjeet Pardesi at the above
email address.
The information supplied to you is protected by the Copyright, Designs and
Patents Act 1988. Any documents produced by government officials will be
covered by Crown Copyright. You are free to use the information for your
own purposes, including any non-commercial research you are doing and for
the purposes of news reporting. Any other reuse, for example commercial
publication, would require the permission of the copyright holder and is
regulated by the Reuse of Public Sector Information Regulations 2005. You
can find details on the arrangements for re-using Crown Copyright at:
Office of Public Sector Information
Information Policy Team
Kew
Richmond
Surrey
TW9 4DU
Email: [1][email address]
If you are unhappy with the decision, you have the right to appeal
directly to the Information Commissioner. The Information Commissioner
can be contacted at:
Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
If the Commissioner comes to the conclusion that further information
should be released, he will issue an enforcement notice which will set out
the steps which the Department must take and the date by which they must
be taken.
If you have any queries about this letter, please contact Prabjeet Pardesi
at the above email address. Please remember to quote your reference
number in any future communications.
Yours sincerely,
Paul Schofield
Deputy Director, Office of the Schools Commissioner
[2]www.dcsf.gov.uk
Your correspondence has been allocated the reference number 2009/0060857.
show quoted sections
Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.
References
Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
2. http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/
Things to do with this request
- Add an annotation (to help the requester or others)
- Download a zip file of all correspondence